proxy_unlink

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the operation is reversible, requires specific permissions, or affects other clips. The sole phrase 'unlink any proxy media' is minimal.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence, concise in length. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity, making it borderline under-specified.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the simple input (one required param, no output schema), the description should explain what 'handle' means and what 'unlink' entails. It does not, leaving significant gaps for the agent to resolve.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain the 'handle' parameter, but it only mentions the action on 'any proxy media from a clip', giving no insight into what 'handle' refers to (e.g., clip identifier, media path).

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'Unlink' and the resource 'proxy media from a clip', making the tool's purpose clear. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like 'clip_unlink' or 'proxy_link', which have overlapping domains.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'proxy_link' or 'clip_unlink'. No context for prerequisites or scenarios is provided.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.